Put public’s interest first

Lack of competition Tuesday in some legislative elections was no accident. When politicians redraw districts, it is bound to happen. A nonpartisan redistricting process would better serve the public’s interest.

Tuesday’s general election gave voters the opportunity to choose the candidates they support for president, Congress, the state Legislature, and county positions, not to mention a chance to pass judgment on a state constitutional amendment and a referendum here or there.

It all looks so straightforward as voters, with pens in hand, mark their choices. Election Day is the people’s day, right?

Not as much as it should be.

Story Archived

Only the most recent 7 days of articles are available for free. For articles older than 7 days there is a small fee for retrieval from our archive. If you are a registered member of the site, the content is free just by signing in below.

Please sign in with your Comment Member ID and password.

Did you purchase access?

Member ID:
Password:
Forgot Your Password?
Register to comment.

Purchase Access
To allow for flexibility, we offer a variety of options for purchasing articles:
Purchase options


Having trouble?

If you have any technical difficulties, either with your username and password or with the payment options, please contact us by e-mail at archivedesk@shawmedia.com

Blogs

» Out Here
Out Here

Wise saw collapse in support

Last week, Sterling Alderwoman Amy Viering attended her last meeting as a city official. She gave the usual praise one hears at such departures. But one compliment stuck out. At the end of her speech, she turned to City Administrator Scott Shumard and said, "You're awesome."
» Out Here
Out Here

On pensions, Bivins and GOP far apart

Sen. Tim Bivins, R-Dixon, joined with many of his fellow Senate Republicans this week to reject a pension bill sponsored by Democratic Senate President John Cullerton of Chicago. The measure passed 40-16. Bivins had a different reason for his no vote.

Reader Poll

How concerned are you that the IRS targeted conservative political groups for additional and often burdensome scrutiny?

Very concerned
Somewhat concerned
Not very concerned
Not concerned at all